Cited by 155Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Distorted expectancy coding in problem gambling: is the addictive in the anticipation?

van Holst, Ruth J., Veltman, Dick J., Büchel, Christian, van den Brink, Wim, Goudriaan, Anna E.·2012·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Pathologic gamblers are known to have abnormal neural responses associated with experiencing monetary wins and losses. However, neural responsiveness during reward and loss expectations in pathologic gamblers has not yet been investigated.Methods We used a functional magnetic resonance imaging paradigm that allowed us to investigate the dissociable reward- and loss-related expectancies with various probabilities of winning or losing different amounts of money in 15 patients with problem gambling (PRGs) and 16 healthy control subjects (HCs).Results Compared with HCs, PRGs showed stronger activation in the bilateral ventral striatum to 5 euro than to 1 euro trials. PRGs also showed more activation of the bilateral ventral striatum and left orbitofrontal cortex associated with gain-related expected value than HCs. In addition, regression analyses indicated a highly significant negative correlation between gambling severity scores and right amygdala activation associated with gain-related expected value coding. There were no group differences in brain activation for loss-related expected value.Conclusions PRGs show higher activity in the reward system during reward expectation than HCs, whereas we observed no difference between PRGs and HC in the loss value system. Furthermore, the negative relation between gambling severity and amygdala activation in gain expected value coding suggests that more severe PRGs are less likely to be risk aversive during gambling. Our study provides evidence that PRGs are characterized by abnormally increased reward expectancy coding, which may render them overoptimistic with regard to gambling outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.12.030

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dopaminergic surges typically occur before the reward, when a cue signals the reliable delivery of a reward.

    “dopaminergic surges typically occur before the reward, or more precisely when a cue (e.g., a beep indicating that one can press a lever) signals the reliable delivery of a reward”

    From Hypernatural Monitoring: A Social Rehearsal Account of Smartphone Addiction (2018) · cites this paper as van Holst et al., 2012

  • Reward anticipation is a much more powerful mediator of strong addictions than outcome evaluations of the stimulus itself.

    “reward anticipation is a much more powerful mediator of strong addictions than outcome evaluations of the stimulus itself”

    From Hypernatural Monitoring: A Social Rehearsal Account of Smartphone Addiction (2018) · cites this paper as van Holst et al., 2012

  • Addictions become strongest when we cannot figure out the pattern of when to reliably expect them.

    “addictions become strongest when we cannot figure out the pattern of when to reliably expect them”

    From Hypernatural Monitoring: A Social Rehearsal Account of Smartphone Addiction (2018) · cites this paper as van Holst et al., 2012

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 57 · Cited by 155

Authors
van Holst, R. J., Veltman, D. J., Büchel, C., van den Brink, W., & Goudriaan, A. E.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Universität Hamburg (DE)
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-04
Volume
71
Issue
8
Pages
741-748
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2119041204
Cited by
155
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 5
FWCI
22.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Dutch Scientific Organization (91676084)
  • Amsterdam Brain Imaging Platform
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
problem gambling, pathologic gambling, reward expectancy, ventral striatum, orbitofrontal cortex, amygdala, gambling severity, risk aversion
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Basal Ganglia, Frontal Lobe, Gambling, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Middle Aged, Reaction Time, Reward, Case-Control Studies, Functional Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review